Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Hi shark how are u gettin in with right to consolidate its stopping me selling some stuff

Budget states intent to sell more ukar assets to repay £15.65bn B&B owes to FSCS. Book value=£27.3bn mar 15, guess the price!

So MX mortgages are 'worth' about half.

I'm open to offers from UKAR to pay off my mortgages at 50 pence in the pound.

Reply to the comment left by "Jonathan Clarke" at "19/03/2016 - 08:48":

Make it so!

Reply to the comment left by "Monty Bodkin" at "19/03/2016 - 13:47":

Yeah, like they'd landlords benefit in any way whatsoever. Far better to sell it off at half price to some chums in big business.

Reply to the comment left by "Monty Bodkin" at "19/03/2016 - 13:47":

I would rather have had the opportunity to buy some of the NR book on the same terms that Cerberus got, than the opportunity to buy some Lloyds shares in the last sell off.

Alas, the former was not on offer.

I will be keeping half an eye on the UKAR situation to see what sort of deal gets done. I am particularly interested to see if there is any sort of write down on the book value of the assets in advance of any deal being done.

The government is clearly only really interested in getting the money owed to the FSCS out of the deal. The budget 2016 policy document confirms that in very stark terms: in fact in a manner that can be compared to Gordon Brown announcing his intention to sell the country's gold. And we know what happened there...

I have just sent this to Olivia at the telegraph I urge as many as possible to do the same they are keen for landlords to contact them I am acting on behalf of 5 who have a combined 500+

Hi Olivia

I have just read you article about the scandalous buy to let attack by George Osborne ( can hardly day his name I am that angry )

I have approx 70 buy to let properties in the north west my business partner has 350 and has an office and over 10 permanent employees. I also have four friends who have 40 + properties

To put in simple terms clause 24 is going to be carnage as the removal of mortgage interest as a cost means tax bills will be more than profit ? How is that fair ? And ultimately it will be the tenants that pay.

I am already ear marking my larger family homes some of which I have had tenants for 10 years to be put up for sale as they have the larger mortgage interest. This is as a direct result of the ludicrous attack on our sector namely clause 24. It is worth noting I have never increased rents of any of these tenants and in some cases reduced to assist them during these difficult times.

The bulk of my portfolio is smaller ex council houses with housing benefit and eastern European workers. These houses I will keep but the rents will be raised ( just to cover the tax )which will mean the social housing tenants will not be able to afford the Increases thus they will have to look for somewhere else and I can tell you they won't find anywhere as I get the council calling me all the time asking for accommodation ? These houses will be let to Eastern Europeans who will be able to afford the increase.

I am speaking to a barrister tomorrow about incorporating my portfolio but this is going to be extremely expensive and for what ? to carry on what I do under a limited company structure to avoid Osbournes clear discrimination.

I will put it in simple terms if landords who are unaware or do nothing will probably go bankrupt very quickly imagine if myself and my partners had to do this 450 mainly vulnerable families evicted all down to that idiot in London who couldn't run a bath let alone an economy

I urge you and your paper to get behind us and and get the situation out to as many people as possible because I am not scaremongering I am telling you what will happen I seeing it with my own eyes.

The most unfair thing is it being applied retrospectively thus making our business model unviable over night. If he's hell bent in taking the sting out of buy to let why not have it on new purchases at least we know what we a getting into and can plan accordingly

Also the wider economy will be affected as I have stopped buying and refurbishing property meaning all the tradesmen I use are looking for work and asking when the next refurb is happening to which I say have a word with good old George as I am not buying anymore during this blatent attack on me and my family

Reply to the comment left by "NW Landlord" at "19/03/2016 - 12:04":

Hi. Not selling either. One a lemon. The other a good earner. Awaiting court case so can dispose of lemon but worried it may trigger something. In mean time paying the mortgages and watching mortgage terms closely.It will be interesting.

Chris.

We are regrettably letting go our best tenants to dispose of a house which has the highest maintenance overhead, we are keeping another simply because under Clause 24 the figures work better.
However for us that is not the end of buy to let, simply a start to a restructure.

It isn't the end I agree but it is a massive headache restructuring and for what ? to carry on the same under a ltd company so unfair it's ridiculous

we just get accross to the public that the way it was presented was so flawed and misrepresented. Basically lies and propaganda at worse, school boys errors if you are more forgiving. But more importantly, the discrimination, the effects, the damage through the supply chain. There were 2 articles today from landlords affected. Lord Flight has been great. We need to get the truth out. Well done all